As a rater, I do not believe that I am influenced by comps. At the end of the day, it is just a complete non-factor to me.
I agree, it's a non issue to me. In fact the highest rated courses I have, I had to pay.
In terms of Parker, there is no way he has tasted 10,000 wines and paid. I read once he gets something like 10 bottles per day sent to his home. He has so many wines he doesn't rate California wine anymore, it's passed off to one of his employees.
I read this as well;
"Parker has stated very clearly, both in The Wine Advocate and his books, that his advice stands on high ethical standards; independence and impartiality constitute his two most important values, he says. By abiding by these standards, he says, he seeks to guarantee that his valuations will be pro-consumer, and not pro-industry.[citation needed]
Several published sources offer accounts that may call Parker's independence and impartiality into question.
In her book Emperor of Wine, Elin McCoy describes a positive article Parker wrote in the second issue of The Baltimore/Washington Wine Advocate about MacArthur Liquors and its manager, Addy Bassin. That article fails to mention that Mr. Bassin sold Parker a list of MacArthur's customers for use in mailing out the first, free issue of the Advocate, a potential conflict of interest.[38]
In issue 164 of The Wine Advocate, Parker wrote a long article about Jeffrey Davies, a wine trader based in Bordeaux. As Hanna Agostini and Marie-Françoise Guichard point out in their book Robert Parker, Anatomy of a Myth, what Parker failed to mention was that he tasted wines with Davies, not by himself—yet Parker has repeatedly stated that an impartial wine critic should taste wines alone.[39] Davies advised Parker not to publish his comments on the 2004 Bordeaux in issue 164, as Parker had planned, because they would have suffered from their comparison with the much better 2003 and 2005. Parker followed Davies' advice, and published those comments in the following issue instead.
The second issue of The Baltimore/Washington Wine Advocate stated "Robert Parker has no interest, direct or indirect, financial or any other, in importing, distributing or selling wines."[40] In the early 1990s, Parker invested in an Oregon vineyard with his brother-in-law: Les Beaux-Frères ("The Brothers-in-Law"). He promised never to review any wines produced there in The Wine Advocate.[41]
Two of Parker’s tasters had, or still have, an interest in the distribution or the sale of wines, according to published accounts.
Until January 1, 2007, David Schildknecht spent half of his time importing and distributing wines, and the other half critiquing wine for The Wine Advocate. Today he is a full-time critic for The Wine Advocate.[42]
Kevin Zraly is the vice-president of Smith and Wollensky Restaurants, a group of 17 restaurants with a substantial wine list.[43]
Robert Parker's goddaughter, Marie Raynaud, is the daughter of Alain Raynaud—the co-owner of Château la Croix-de-Gay in Pomerol and former owner of Château Quinault in Saint-Émilion. Mr. Raynaud was the President of the Union des Grands Crus de Bordeaux, an advocacy group for the Grand Crus of Bordeaux, between 1994 and 2000.[44]
Yale University professor, econometrician, and lawyer Ian Ayres wrote about Robert Parker's conflict with Orley Ashenfelter, the publisher of Liquid Assets: The International Guide to Fine Wines,[45] in his book Super Crunchers. Ashenfelter devised a formula for predicting wine quality based on weather data such as rainfall and temperature that Parker characterized as "ludicrous and absurd." Ashenfelter was able to show that Parker's initial ratings of vintages had been biased upward, requiring him to revise his rankings downward more often than not. Says Ayres, "Both the wine dealers and writers have a vested interest in maintaining their informational monopoly on the quality of wine." Ayres pointed out that Ashenfelter's predictions have proven to be remarkably accurate, and claimed the wine critics' "predictions now correspond much more closely to [Ashenfelter's] simple equation results."[46]"
[edit]